Gun Control Punishment of the Law Abiding

The shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School sparked another massive wave of gun control hysteria across America. President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, Governor O'Malley, Senator Feinstein and hundreds of others have been fanning the fires of gun control frenzy since December 14, 2012. The loss of those innocent lives is indeed a tragedy of unimaginable proportions for those who lived and are still living that nightmare.

Yet, the voices of those calling for gun control, speak without solid rational thought.

Everyone, from President Obama to Governor O'Malley, Mayor Bloomberg and Senator Feinstein, along with dozens of other politicians are clamoring for everything from a ban on assault weapons, to high capacity magazines, a 50% tax on ammunition, a $25.00 registration fee on guns, banning on-line sales of ammunition, requiring background checks to buy ammo, allowing only seven rounds to be loaded into a magazine, declaring a shotgun that holds more then five rounds an assault weapon and, in New York, forcing those currently owning high capacity magazines to sell them out of state within one year.

Some of these measures have already been signed into law without first asking the most logical questions.

Who is most impacted by every existing gun law across America?

Who will face the greater consequences of new gun laws?

The answer, of course, is the law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately, this has always been the standard? Why? Is it because our lawmakers know it's the easier path to pursue? Maybe so, but the bigger issues still remain after the passing of new gun laws. The violent criminals, gangs, the mentally impaired and the mentally unstable will continue to be a problem, and no laws enacted years ago, laws passed today or tomorrow will effect them.

Does anyone truly believe that a criminal will immediately run out and purchase liability insurance?

Does anyone really believe that a criminal will register a firearm and pay the $25.00 registration fee?

Does anyone believe that a criminal will turn in or sell their high capacity magazines?

Does anyone believe that a criminal will load only seven rounds into a high capacity magazine?

Does anyone believe that a mentally impaired person will carefully assess the aftermath of their planned violent rampage?
Anyone with an ounce of common sense, including those clamoring for these laws, surely knows the answer to those questions is a resounding "No." Yet, the president, governors, mayors and others will charge ahead, full throttle, powered by the anti-gun hysteria to get their laws passed. And, in the end, the only people of America affected by these laws will be those who already obey the law.

Quacking loud and long for some of the strictest gun laws ever is Senator Dianne Feinstein who, in fact, has a permit to carry a firearm and has declared publicly that she would use it to defend herself. What is she saying with this declaration?

It's okay for her to have a firearm to defend herself, but to hell with the rest of America?
It also appears that Hypocrite Feinstein puts a favorable gun control spin on facts and figures. The following quotes are direct from an article titled, Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill: (http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/Feinstein-goes-for-broke-with-new-gun-bill) Department of Justice Study.

On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban (Assault Weapons) resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: "At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.

Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995... However, with only one year of past-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously. "Assault weapon" numbers and murder trends.

From the imposition of Feinstein's "assault weapon" ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of "assault weapons" has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an "assault weapon" is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE's firearm manufacturer reports.

From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s-all models of which Feinstein's new bill defines as "assault weapons" rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type."

Another article of interest titled "Ten Big Killers: The Chart Anti-Gunners Don't Want You To See" (http://www.evolution-interrupted.com/the-chart-anti-gunners-don't-want-you-to-see) was posted online January 7, 2013. The sources for the data relating to deaths per year are, The Centers for Disease Control, The FBI and the U. S. Federal Government.

In fact, I believe that Obama, Feinstein, O'Malley, Bloomberg and their supporters know that more gun control laws cannot and will not prevent another mass shooting event. They could pass a gun control law a day from now throughout eternity and it would not prevent another mass shooting. Yet, their solution to a problem they cannot fix is to attack the law-abiding citizens and punish them for crimes committed by others.

Is this the way of the new America? If we cannot prevent criminals and the mentally unstable from killing, we the lawmakers will take it out on those who live by the law. Well, that certainly seems to be their answer.

Let's take one more step with the cry for stricter gun control laws. What would happen if our lawmakers were able to push through a bill ordering the confiscation of all firearms? Who would they immediately go after? You can bet your life it would be the law-abiding citizen. Why? Because they obeyed the law requiring registration of their firearms, government officials know where they reside and the good citizen will, in all likelihood, offer the path of least resistance. The criminals? Well, the criminals would get a free pass because they did not obey the law.

So, it would be gun crime as usual on the streets of Chicago, Baltimore, New York, Washington, D. C., Houston and Los Angeles, while a mentally unstable person loads his guns and plans a mass shooting at a mall, church or school in your neighborhood.
Welcome to the real world of Obama, Feinstein, Bloomberg and O'Malley gun control.